EBME Forums Forums Management Medical Equipment Management How long should we keep records?

Ah yes. The Old Chestnut.

John wasn't talking about what (data) the records contain, just how long to keep them!

OK ... let's move forward. Electronic form : tick. Paperless : tick.

But meanwhile, let's not forget also that some sheds haven't even gotten around to setting up a (rudimentary) PM system yet!

PS: if you like I can link back to earlier threads about which records need to be retained, but I suspect you don't need them. Personally, I have never seen the need to keep each and every esoteric leakage current spewed out by automatic safety testers. In my experience, folks have stored such records (on disc) just because they can (that is, by downloading from the tester).

PPS: "back in the day" we used to have a few filing cabinets stuffed full of files. That is, a file for each item of equipment (or, in the case of the oft-mentioned flowmeters, one file to cover all). Actually, those files (with a couple of notable exceptions) weren't all that fat, even those that were approaching twenty years old. No, it was an entirely manageable, and (I dare say) efficient, way of going about things ... at the time.

PPPS: I have also used Kardex systems ... which also worked well, up to a point (especially for parts stock control). Oh yes, I've tried 'em all!

The bottom line:- all systems may very well be valid and appropriate in the situation and circumstances to which they pertain. Just as long as they are based upon Common Sense (and there's the rub, right there)!

Sorry Geoff, not quite clear which old chestnut you are refering to here?



Understood, my point was that not all data should be kept, just a summary. This then is kept for, at a "conventional minimum" 7 years or, if we are talking about "full life cycle management" for the life of that piece of equipment. I thought that was clear but perhaps not.

Chestnuts!

I agree about the summary. But (apart from zealots like myself), who is going to wade through all that data to produce the summary (summaries)?

To be frank (and why not), many biomeds I encounter seem to have enough trouble with simply entering service updates (into the computer) in the first place!

PS: yes, we are indeed talking about "full life cycle management" ... anything less is not worth the craic in my humble opinion.

Easy, our database does it for us !!!!

That's the wonder of today's systems. I can easily get a "precis" (sorry, don't know how to do the acute accent here) of the full history.

Yes, I know it ain't the same the world over but I am still harking back to John's original question which, as far as I remember applies to the ENGLISH NHS (your words not mine) so I am tending towards that end of the world's systems.


5.4.3.2.1......

Yes, I agree. I am (and have been for many years) very much a database man myself, after all.

So yes, précis is a good word!

But ... (and again I make the point), believe it or not, not every biomed is totally au fait with software tools, and many more simply don't have the time to play about with them!

And (again being honest), some blokes I have come across don't even see the point in bothering too much about records anyway!

I guess we are in broad agreement here. I only wish (and it is only a dream, with very little chance of becoming reality, as far as I can tell) that the NHS would introduce some sort of standardisation into all this. As things stand, I don't think I would be wrong in suggesting that each hospital more or less "does it's own thing" (not only in this, but also many other aspects of tech support)!

In summary, to be useful, I believe that John's question should be expanded to encompass not so much the "how long", but also the "what" (and, possibly even the "where" and "by whom") service records need to be er, ... maintained! And even (and here's a whole new can of worms) whether they should be subject to audit!*

* As per JCAHO et al.

Struth, that's it, I'm of to bed......

Seriously though, are you (and all the others watching this) telling me that the various NHS Trusts do not have effective database systems running in their biomed departments? (even if they are not common across the country) You jest me thinks. This is 2009, I cannot believe that manual systems are still being used in the UK.

Still, until tomorrow.....

I note the word "effective" being used there.

Why don't we have a Poll? It's been a while since we had one, after all.

Have a referendum instead, just joking, if there is a database then there is no need to delete, but the purchase, acceptance, work orders and PPM task sheets in hard copy should be kept on file until the equipment is disposed of, if the equipment is being 'moved-on' the hard copy should accompany the equipment. Simple logic.

Geoff, "In summary, to be useful, I believe that John's question should be expanded to encompass not so much the "how long", but also the "what" (and, possibly even the "where" and "by whom") service records need to be er, ... maintained! And even (and here's a whole new can of worms) whether they should be subject to audit!*" This is what MSD are doing out here, ensuring that the paper chase is all in order, still there is no common database shared by the military hospitals, and our home grown system was tested 2 weeks ago and IT have gone back to the drawing board.

Agreed. ... to your "simple logic" post, that is.

For completeness, I would also add the spare parts records relating to the equipment in question. After all "back in the day", we used to actually plan for forecast parts usage, believe it or not (and stock accordingly)!

Second post ... never mind, that's what some of us are attempting to do here (on the forum) ... but the approach is somewhat different. That is, "having the debate", "spreading the word" (sharing the wisdom) ... but then letting folk (biomed techs, in the main) draw their own conclusions, and act accordingly (or not at all, as they see fit).

After (outside of the armed forces proper), human psychology tends to oppose any hint of compulsion. Persuasion is the only way forward I can see (especially in these "modern" times, when everyone and his dog is "university educated")!

Sorry to hear about the system. After all this time, I guess I can't really say "teething problems", can I? Care to mention the nature of the problem(s) being encountered?

Re: the "common database" ... remember the MoH's MAMISS? All that must have been back in the late 1980's. So much, then, for "progress"!